Saturday, 7 February 2015

A three car convoy is considered modest for leading Nigerian
politicians, and modesty appeals to Muhammadu Buhari, the leading
opposition candidate in the presidential election due to be held on
February 14th. From his rented house made of simple concrete with few
windows, his cars drive into a busy street and are almost immediately
stuck in traffic. Without the armed outriders and flashing lights that
ease the passage of officials in the ruling party he inches his way to
the airport in Abuja, the capital, his aides glancing around nervously.The aura of power catches up at the terminal building as he prepares
to start the day’s campaigning. Courtiers, jobseekers and hangers-on in
colourful garb and headgear rush in. Shyly he shakes hands. Mr Buhari, a
72-year-old retired general who ruled Nigeria for 20 months in the
mid-1980s (and then spent 40 months in detention), may be on the verge
of triggering the first democratic change of power in the country’s
modern history. Polling and observers suggest the race between him and
the incumbent, Goodluck Jonathan (pictured) is too close to call, with
each commanding about 42% of the vote (see chart).

Ever since 1999, when the army relinquished power, Nigeria has been
ruled by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), a sophisticated political
machine greased by billions of dollars’ worth of oil money. Yet less
cash is available these days. A sharp decline in the oil price has
coincided, unluckily for Mr Jonathan, with the election. Government
revenues have halved in recent months and the currency has tumbled by a
quarter. Civil servants are paid late, if at all. Infrastructure
projects have stalled.But the government’s biggest liabilities are the result of its own
greed. Officials have never been shy about dipping into public troughs
but the present lot is, by common consent, especially avaricious. Last
year the governor of the central bank said that $20 billion had gone
missing. He was sacked for his trouble. A report into his allegations is
now on Mr Jonathan’s desk. Rampant theft has not only harmed the
economy and exacerbated poverty but it has also contributed to public
insecurity.With corruption endemic even in the army, soldiers are sent to the
front line short of ammunition and rations. Demoralised and poorly led,
they have failed to quell a jihadist insurgency in the north-east that
has killed thousands. Almost a year ago militants from Boko Haram, a
jihadist group that claims to have established a “caliphate” over a
chunk of the country, kidnapped more than 250 girls from the town of
Chibok. The government barely stirred until it was goaded into action by
an international outcry.With much of the north-east in flames—around 1.5m people have been
forced to flee their homes—many voters believe Nigeria’s situation today
is worse than at any time since the civil war in the late 1960s. To be
sure, large parts of the country remain secure and the economy has
boomed in recent years, but insecurity is spilling southward. Left
unchecked, the insurgency could tear Nigeria apart.At rallies, Mr Jonathan encounters unenthusiastic supporters; many
are paid to turn up and so leave before his speech ends. Chairs are
provided, perhaps to make the crowd seem larger. At a rally in Yola in
late January they were thrown at him. Elsewhere his convoy has been
stoned. Some election billboards are guarded by soldiers, giving rise to
calls that the men should fight Boko Haram instead.The candidates, and their parties, exhibit few ideological
differences. The election revolves around questions of honesty and
competence as well as ethnic and religious identity—unsurprisingly,
given Nigeria’s diversity, with 500 languages spoken among its almost
200m people. Mr Jonathan is a Christian from the south whereas Mr Buhari
is a northern Muslim (see map).

The key to victory for either candidate may lie partly in whether
people vote along religious lines. To win, Mr Buhari must convince
Christian voters, predominantly in the south, that being Muslim is not
synonymous with Islamism. The atmosphere at Buhari rallies—even those
held away from his northern heartland—suggest that momentum is on his
side. Many attendees are euphoric with optimism that he can fix the
country.They also hope that, as a former military man, he knows “how to make
soldiers fight, not run away.” He has some form. Under his command in
the early 1980s the Nigerian army drove out Chadian rebels from areas
now held by Boko Haram (and which, ironically, are now being contested
by Chadian soldiers who have been sent to assist Nigeria).They also look at his record in fighting corruption. When he was head
of state he, rather unusually for the office, kept his fingers out of
the till. He locked up hundreds during an anti-corruption campaign and
launched a “war against indiscipline” in which he got whip-wielding
soldiers to enforce orderly queuing. Civil servants who arrived at work
late were forced to perform “frog jump” squats.Yet, during this period thousands of political opponents were
detained without trial, political meetings were banned and the press was
tightly controlled. Hundreds of people were tried before secret
military tribunals and many were executed for crimes that were not
capital offences when they were committed. Eager to play up his past the
PDP has been publishing photos of him in military uniform with the
headline, “Once a dictator, always a dictator”.Activists and foreign diplomats are unworried by his past. His
running mate, Yemi Osinbajo, is a lawyer and pastor with a strong record
of championing human rights. Mr Buhari, for his part, told The Economist:
“We have to stick to the constitution of the country. Once upon a time I
was a military man. But I do not want to militarise democracy.”If anything, Mr Buhari’s biggest flaw is the opposite of what the PDP
alleges. He has never been a forceful character; he can be Reaganesque
in his inclination to set the tone and direction of policy but leave the
details to others. His party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), is
the product of a recent merger of the four main opposition groups.
Ruling-party bigwigs dismiss it as a “party of candidates” squabbling
for power. Attempts to form a united opposition party at previous
elections failed because the leaders could not agree on a joint
candidate. This time they did, holding a credible primary before
choosing Mr Buhari.The APC has, moreover, already shown it can govern competently. It
runs the two most populous urban areas, Kano and Lagos, and almost half
the federal states. Supporters on both sides have threatened to protest
violently against a loss. Tempers will probably also flare if there are
widespread irregularities in the conduct of the vote.
Some fear a Buhari victory could lead to an eruption of violence in the
Niger Delta, the home region of Mr Jonathan, where the government has
bought a precarious peace by paying off former militants. A victory for
Mr Jonathan could, meanwhile, spark unrest in the north. The vote in
2011 was judged one of the country’s fairest, and yet almost a thousand
people died in communal fighting.This election could mark a permanent shift in Nigerian politics away
from one-party rule. The powerful used to crowd around one big trough,
awaiting their turn. Now they must choose between two troughs. That
makes for potentially nastier politics. But if Nigeria can hold
together, there is a hope of better government.